 |
|
|
|||||
A U.S. lawmaker plans to introduce legislation in coming weeks to verify the location of artificial-intelligence chips like those made by Nvidia after they are sold. The effort to keep tabs on the chips, which drew bipartisan support from U.S. lawmakers, aims to address reports of widespread smuggling of Nvidia’s chips into China in violation of U.S. export control laws. Nvidia’s chips are a critical ingredient for creating AI systems such as chatbots, image generators and more specialized ones that can help craft biological weapons. Both President Donald Trump and his predecessor, Joe Biden, have implemented progressively tighter export controls of Nvidia’s chips to China. But Reuters and other news organizations have documented how some of those chips have continued to flow into China, and Nvidia has publicly claimed it cannot track its products after they are sold. U.S. Representative Bill Foster, a Democrat from Illinois who once worked as a particle physicist, said the technology to track chips after they are sold is readily available, with much of it already built in to Nvidia’s chips. Independent technical experts interviewed by Reuters agreed. Foster, who successfully designed multiple computer chips during his scientific career, plans to introduce in coming weeks a bill that would direct U.S. regulators to come up with rules in two key areas: Tracking chips to ensure they are where they are authorized to be under export control licenses, and preventing those chips from booting up if they are not properly licensed under export controls. Foster told Reuters that there are already credible reports – some of which have not been publicly disclosed – of chip smuggling occurring on a large scale. “This is not an imaginary future problem,” Foster told Reuters. “It is a problem now, and at some point we’re going to discover that the Chinese Communist Party, or their military, is busy designing weapons using large arrays of chips, or even just working on (artificial general intelligence), which is as immediate as nuclear technology.” Nvidia declined to comment for this story. Chip smuggling has taken on new urgency after the emergency of China’s DeepSeek, whose AI systems posed a strong challenge to U.S. systems and were built with Nvidia chips that were prohibited for sale to China, according analyst firm SemiAnalysis. Prosecutors in Singapore have charged three Chinese nationals with fraud in a case that involved servers that may have contained Nvidia chips. Though it has not been put into broad use, the technology to verify the location of chips already exists. Alphabet’s Google already tracks the location of its in-house AI chips and others in its vast network of data centers for security purposes, according to two sources with direct knowledge of its operations. Google did not respond to a request for comment. Foster’s legislation would give the U.S. Department of Commerce six months to come up with regulations to require the technology. Bipartisan support Foster’s bill has support from fellow Democrats such as Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi, the ranking member on the House Select Committee on China. “On-chip location verification is one creative solution we should explore to stop this smuggling,” Krishnamoorthi said in a statement. Republicans are also supportive, with Representative John Moolenaar, who chairs the committee, telling Reuters that “the Select Committee has strong bipartisan support for requiring companies like Nvidia to build location-tracking into their high-powered AI chips and the technology to do it already exists. The technology for verifying the location of chips would rely on the chips communicating with a secured computer server that would use the length of time it takes for the signal to reach the server to verify where chips are, a concept that relies on knowing that computer signals move at the speed of light. Tim Fist, a former engineer and director of emerging technology policy at Washington think tank Institute for Progress, said such tracking would provide a general, country-level location for chips. But that is far more information than the Bureau of Industry and Security, the arm of the U.S. Commerce Department responsible for enforcement of export controls, currently has. “BIS has no idea which chips they should be targeting as a potential high priority to investigate once they’ve gone overseas,” Fist said. With location verification, “they now at least have bucketed the set of chips that are out there in the world into ones that are very likely to not have been smuggled and ones that warrant further investigation.” Foster’s second legislative goal of preventing AI chips from booting up if they are not properly licensed under U.S. export controls would be more technologically complex to implement than location verification, but he said the time has come to begin discussions for both efforts. “We’ve gotten enough input that I think now we can have more detailed discussions with the actual chip and module providers to say, ‘How would you actually implement this?'” Foster told Reuters. Stephen Nellis and Max A. Cherney, Reuters
Category:
E-Commerce
The Trump administration says the sweeping tariffs it unveiled April 2, then postponed for 90 days, have a simple goal: Force other countries to drop their trade barriers to U.S. goods.Yet President Donald Trump’s definition of trade barriers includes a slew of issues well beyond the tariffs other countries impose on the U.S., including some areas not normally associated with trade disputes. Those include agricultural safety requirements, tax systems, currency exchange rates, product standards, legal requirements, and red tape at the border.He’s given countries three months to come up with concessions before tariffs ranging from 10% to more than 50% go into effect. Tariffs on China are already in effect.On many issues it will be difficult, or in some cases impossible, for many countries to make a deal and lower their tariff rates.In addition, many trade officials from targeted countries say privately that it isn’t always clear what the Trump administration wants from them in the negotiations.Vice President JD Vance announced that India has agreed to the terms of trade talks with the United States, but other countries are still trying to set the contours for any negotiations. The White House has highlighted conflicting goals for its import taxes: It’s seeking to raise revenues and bring manufacturing back to the U.S., but it also wants greater access to foreign markets and massive changes to other nations’ tax and regulatory policies.Here are several non-tariff areas the administration is targeting: CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATES Trump has accused Germany, China and Japan of “global freeloading” by in his view devaluing their currencies to make their exports cheaper.The European Central bank has been cutting interest rates to support growth. That could also weaken the euro, which has strengthened sharply against the dollar since Trump took office. The ECB says it doesn’t target the exchange rate.In Japan’s case, the Bank of Japan has been gradually raising rates anyway after keeping them at zero or in negative territory for years, which should drive the yen up against the dollar. The U.S. dollar has fallen recently to 140-yen levels, down from about 160 yen last summer. Shrikant Kale, a strategist at Jefferies, believes the dollar will fall to 120 yen over the next 18 months. FARM PRODUCTS Agricultural safeguards against importing pests or health hazards have been a sticking point with U.S. trade partners for years. They include Japan’s restrictions on rice and potato imports, the EU’s ban on hormone-treated beef or chlorine-disinfected chickens and Korea’s ban on beef from cows more than 30 months old.Yet changes face stiff political resistance from voters and farm lobbies in those countries.For years, U.S. potato growers have sought access to Japan’s potential $150 million market for table potatoes. Japan has engaged in talks but taken years simply to supply a list of concerns to U.S. negotiators. The delay is “pure politics,” intended to protect domestic growers, says National Potato Council CEO Kam Quarles. If Japanese politicians perceive the pain from Trump’s tariffs might be worse than from their own potato growers, “that makes it more likely to make a deal,” Quarles said.But “if they perceive the pain domestically will be worse than the Trump administration can bring to them we’re going to be stuck where we are.”Korea’s beef restrictions started as a measure to keep out bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease. The 30-month rule has been maintained in the wake of mass protests in 2008, even as the U.S. has become the largest beef exporter to Korea.“It’s still politically controversial because of the scar at the time in 2008. I think the government will be very cautious,” said Jaemin Lee, professor of law at Seoul National University and an expert on trade issues. TAXATION Trump has railed against value-added tax as a burden to U.S. companies, although economists say this kind of tax is trade-neutral because it applies equally to imports and exports. Value-added tax, or VAT, is paid by the end purchaser at the cash register but differs from sales taxes in that it is calculated at each stage of the production process.Trump’s view could mean higher tariffs for Europe, where individual countries levy VAT of 20% or more depending on the type of good, and for the more than 170 countries that use this kind of tax system. The U.S. is an outlier in that it doesn’t use VAT; instead, individual states levy sales taxes.There’s little chance countries will change their tax systems for Trump. The EU for one has said VAT is off the table.“The domestic taxation system has not been a conventional topic in trade negotiation because domestic taxation is directly related to national sovereignty or the domestic economic regime,” trade expert Lee said. “It’s very hard to understand why VAT has become an important topic in the trade discussion.” PRODUCT STANDARDS U.S. officials have complained about Japan’s non-recognition of U.S vehicle safety standards and its different testing procedures for car equipment.Japan also provides subsidies for the Japanese-designed ChaDeMo plug standard for electric cars, requiring foreign makers to use an outdated technology if they want the subsidy. BUREAUCRACY Concerns about excessive or baffling bureaucratic procedures to get goods into a country are mentioned repeatedly in the administration’s latest trade assessment. The U.S. has complained about expensive delays getting permission to export seafood to Japan. Meanwhile, Japan requires wheat imports to be sold to a government entity and has “highly regulated and intransparent” quota system that keeps rice imports from the U.S. to a minimum.Most of these issues are years old, raising questions about whether 90 days is enough to make a deal over them.U.S. pharmaceutical companies have complained about Korea’s system for drug imports, while automakers say environmental equipment standards are unclear and expose only importers to criminal penalties in case of violations. BUY AMERICAN Analysts say that despite the long list of non-tariff issues, the administration’s main focus may lie elsewhere: on Trump’s desire to reduce trade deficits, cases where a country sells more to the U.S. than it buys.And the solution may be other countries buying more U.S. products, from energy to soybeans, and builingd more plants in the U.S.U.S. energy is already a major export to Europe. Trump has mentioned a figure of $350 billion for potential EU gas imports. The EU does need imported gas. But Trump’s figure would be a stretch given that last year’s exports of liquefied natural gas to the EU were around $13 billon, and that Europe is seeking to reduce its use of fossil fuels over the longer term. THE HEART OF THE MATTER? Discussions about non-tariff issues may simply be leverage to nderpin Trump’s stiff tariff levels.“It’s just a thing that’s there to justify my tariffs,” said Tobias Gehrke, senior policy fellow at the European Council of Foreign Relations.While lower level trade officials and industry representatives are acutely aware of non-tariff issues like agricultural safety, “Trump and his cabinet don’t really care about chlorinated chicken regulations in Europe and food standards,” Gehrke said. “They have much bigger thinking.”“They want to have European companies significantly move production to America and to export from America to Europe. That would change the trade balance.”“And if that’s the main logic, then there’s no real deal to be had on non-tariff barriers.” Rugaber contributed from Washington DC and Kageyama from Tokyo. David McHugh, Christopher Rugaber and Yuri Kageyama, AP Business Writers
Category:
E-Commerce
A teenager who admitted being “addicted to speed” behind the wheel had totaled two other cars in the year before he slammed into a minivan at 112 mph (180 kph) in a Seattle suburb, killing the driver and three of the five children she was transporting for a homeschool co-op.After sentencing Chase Daniel Jones last month to more than 17 years in prison, the judge tacked on a novel condition should he drive again: His vehicle must be equipped with a device that prevents accelerating far beyond the speed limit.Virginia this year became the first state to give its judges such a tool to deal with the most dangerous drivers on the road. Washington, D.C., already is using it and similar measures await governors’ signatures in Washington state and Georgia. New York and California also could soon tap the GPS-based technology to help combat a recent national spike in traffic deaths.“It’s a horror no one should have to experience,” said Amy Cohen, who founded the victims’ advocacy group Families for Safe Streets after her 12-year-old son, Sammy Cohen Eckstein, was killed by a speeding driver in front of their New York home more than a decade ago. Turning tragedy into activism Andrea Hudson, 38, the minivan driver who was killed when Jones ran a red light, was building a backyard greenhouse with her husband to help educate several kids who shuttle between homes during the school day, her father, Ted Smith, said.Also killed in the March 2024 crash near Hudson’s home in Renton, Washington, were Boyd “Buster” Brown and Eloise Wilcoxson, both 12, and Matilda Wilcoxson, 13. Hudson’s two children were sitting on the passenger side and survived, but they spent weeks in a hospital.“You always hear of these horrific accidents, and it’s always far away, you don’t know anybody. But all of a sudden, that’s my daughter,” Smith said. “This guy did not swerve or brake. And it was just a missile.”Smith knew Washington state Rep. Mari Leavitt, who reached out to offer condolences and tell him she was sponsoring legislation to mandate intelligent speed assistance devices as a condition for habitual speeders to get back their suspended licenses.Leavitt predicts it will have an even more powerful impact than revoking driving privileges, citing studies showing around three-quarters of people who lose their licenses get behind a wheel anyway.Between 2019 and 2024, the state saw a 200% increase in drivers cited for going at least 50 mph (80 kph) over the speed limit, according to the Washington Traffic Safety Commission.“I guess I don’t understand why someone is compelled to want to drive that fast,” Leavitt said. “But if they choose to drive that fast with the speed limiter, they can’t. It’s going to stop them in their tracks.”The measure, which Washington legislators passed last month and Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson is expected to soon sign, is called the BEAM Act, using the first letters of the names of the four victims: Buster, Eloise, Andrea and Matilda.Because Jones, 19, didn’t receive a speeding ticket in his two previous crashes, he likely wouldn’t have been required to use the speed-limiter ahead of the fatal one. And because it could be 2029 before the law takes effect, the judge’s requirement at sentencing only applies to his time on probation after being released from prison, Smith said. Evolution of a safety tool Competing tech companies that joined forces to lobby for ignition interlock requirements for drunken drivers have been working in unison again the last few years to pitch intelligent speed assistance.Brandy Nannini, chief government affairs officer at one manufacturer, Grapevine, Texas-based Smart Start, said fleet vehicles including school buses in the nation’s capital have been trying it out for years.But it took a lot of refinement before the GPS technology could instantly recognize speed limit changes and compel vehicles with the devices installed to adjust accordingly.“We’ve got a lot more satellites in the sky now,” said Ken Denton, a retired police officer who is the chief compliance officer at Cincinnati-based LifeSafer, part of the coalition of companies.When court-mandated, the devices would prevent cars from exceeding speed limits or whatever threshold regulators set. An override button allows speeding in emergencies, but states can decide whether to activate it and authorities would be alerted any time the button is pushed.A more passive version, which beeps to alert drivers when they are going too fast, is required for new cars in the European Union. California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a similar proposal last year, explaining vehicle safety requirements are set by the federal government and he was concerned a patchwork of state laws could stir confusion. Parents take up the cause Before Del. Patrick Hope agreed to sponsor the proposal in the Virginia Legislature, he tried out the device in Nannini’s car, which was calibrated to not go more than 9 mph (14 kph) over the speed limit.“That was my first question: Is it safe?” Hope said.Not only did he come away convinced it was safe, Hope is now pondering whether to install it on the cars of his three children, all of whom are new drivers.For those mandated by a court, the price could be hefty: $4 per day and a $100 installation fee. The fee would be reduced for low-income offenders.Cohen with Families for Safe Streets, which provides support services to the loved ones of crash victims, knows firsthand the kind of impact slowing down speeders can make. A year after her son was struck and killed in front of their New York apartment, another boy was injured in the same spot.By then, the road’s speed limit had been lowered.“That boy lived when he was hit, and mine did not,” she said. “When you are going a few miles slower, there’s more time to stop. And when you hit somebody, it’s much less likely to be deadly.” Jeff McMurray, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||